tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28102666.post5672310635808830787..comments2015-03-03T14:33:22.801-05:00Comments on Boston 1775: Edmund Bacon’s Twenty YearsJ. L. Bellnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28102666.post-61043179511006351852008-08-20T19:13:00.000-05:002008-08-20T19:13:00.000-05:00That’s the same language used to announce this boo...That’s the <A HREF="http://cvillewords.com/2008/08/20/in-re-hemings-v-jefferson/" REL="nofollow">same language</A> used to announce this book deal through Publishers Lunch this week. <BR/><BR/>Late summer 2008 to spring 2009 is a fast turnaround for a book, indicating that the manuscript is complete. Cville, linked above, suggests it comes from material Hyland prepared for a mock “trial.” I’ve seen a couple of attempts at such legal approaches, and find it silly to try to apply courtroom standards to the history of private behavior of 200 years ago. There’s a reason we have statutes of limitation and other timers in the legal system; as decades pass, evidence that meets trial rules is harder to find. By courtroom standards, it would be difficult to “prove” many events of the Revolutionary War happened.<BR/><BR/>Hyland published a “brief” arguing one side of the issue—which is what a brief is supposed to do. Will his book be a complete consideration of the evidence by equitable standards? Hyland seems to have taken on an especially heavy burden, not only arguing that the evidence for a Jefferson-Hemings affair is inconclusive, but that the evidence shows Jefferson was “entirely innocent.”<BR/><BR/>One common trait of many books and other writings trying to respond to the evidence in favor of a Jefferson-Hemings sexual relationship is the authors’ belief that there would be something wrong with such a relationship—more wrong than him just keeping his wife’s half-sister in bondage. Thus, we get book titles like <I>In Defense of Thomas Jefferson</I> and <I>Jefferson Vindicated</I>, and rhetoric about “guilt,” “suspects,” and so on.<BR/><BR/>Books arguing that the evidence for a relationship is strong tend not to be so judgmental about the possibility of sex between Jefferson and Hemings, though they might be more quick to condemn the slavery system overall. (I can’t help but note that the description of this book calls Hemings a “servant” rather than “slave.”)<BR/><BR/>On <B>Boston 1775</B> I’m happy to see news of upcoming books of interest, but I do like to know if that news comes from someone involved in the books. And to keep commenters sorted out I ask people to sign their comments or use a pseudonym, eighteenth-century style. Thank you.J. L. Bellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15405157000473731801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28102666.post-5659595292882678342008-08-20T06:59:00.000-05:002008-08-20T06:59:00.000-05:00Interesting book is forthcoming: William Hyland's ...Interesting book is forthcoming: William Hyland's IN DEFENSE OF THOMAS JEFFERSON: Unravelling the Sally Hemings Sex Scandal, proving beyond every reasonable doubt that that the evidence against Thomas Jefferson is not only lacking, but in fact Jefferson was entirely innocent of the charge of having sexual relations with his servant, Sally Hemings, Thomas Dunne Books, for publication in Spring 2009.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com